Thinking, Fast And Slow

[EmeraldHope]

Okay, Kahneman reveals a lot in chapter 13 when he talks about the theories of Cass Sunstein. Remember ole Cass?

A little refresher:
https://www.sott.net/articles/show/202120-Cass-Sunstein-Agent-of-COINTELPRO

https://www.sott.net/articles/show/230906-COINTELPRO-Pied-piper-Charlie-Veitch-pulls-a-9-11-U-turn-says-people-who-disbelieve-official-story-are-part-of-paranoid-cult-

https://www.sott.net/articles/show/219703-Cass-Sunstein-Wikileaks-And-The-Public-Right-To-Know

https://www.sott.net/articles/show/239394-Wikileaks-a-COGNITIVE-INFILTRATION-Operation


Kahneman describes Sunstein as "one of the foremost legal scholars in the United States, and shares with other leaders of his profession the attribute of intellectual fearlessness."

I would say that Sunstein is a psychopath if he's anything. At the very least, a raging Authoritarian.

It begins at page 141. On page 142, Kahneman exposes himself as at best, abysmally ignorant or, at worst, deliberately writing disinformation. I think it's the former because I can't believe that anybody who has his education and experiences actually believes what he is writing about the media.

On page 144, he writes that "terrorists are the most significant practitioners of the art of inducing availability cascades." What he leaves out is that those "terrorists" are the governments themselves.

He gives small lip-service to NOT agreeing fully with Sunstein, but I think that is totally disingenuous.

Very briefly, I just wanted to state that I have perhaps found further data to support the above bolded statement by Laura. I just finished the complete Yale course Philosophy and The Science of Human Nature : http://oyc.yale.edu/philosophy/phil-181


In regards to utilitarianism and the trolley problems ( for example, see the Sott article relating certain answers to these types of questions to psychopathy - http://www.sott.net/article/235685-Link-Between-Morality-and-Psychopathy-Antisocial-Personality-Traits-Predict-Utilitarian-Responses-to-Moral-Dilemmas ) our attention is taken to Cass Sunstein and a paper he wrote concerning same in 2008.


We have many trolley examples and are led through each one with the class's answers being displayed after each trolley question in a graph by using live clickers for participation. There are several variations of the trolley issue that we are asked to consider. To make a long story short, Sunstein concludes that if a trolley is on its way to kill five people and there is a fat man standing on a bridge heavy enough to stop the trolley, that we as a bystander should push him. He states this is no different than a scenario where we as a bystander could alter the trolley from a path of killing five people to only killing one person by flipping a lever to alter the track. He basically states that people do not see this because of heuristic errors.


Sunstein also co-authored a book called " Nudge" that I have read a decent amount of that references system one ,system two and heuristics and how this knowledge should be used by governments and private firms to help "nudge' people to make "better" decisions.

 

[lilies]

Reading Thinking: Fast and Slow I think Kahnemann hit the bull's eye in his intro:

Part 5 describes recent research that has introduced a distinction
between two selves, the experiencing self and the remembering self, which
do not have the same interests. For example, we can expose people to
two painful experiences. One of these experiences is strictly worse than
the other, because it is longer. But the automatic formation of memories—
a feature of System 1—has its rules, which we can exploit so that the
worse episode leaves a better memory. When people later choose which
episode to repeat, they are, naturally, guided by their remembering self
and expose themselves (their experiencing self) to unnecessary pain. The
distinction between two selves is applied to the measurement of well being,
where we find again that what makes the experiencing self happy is
not quite the same as what satisfies the remembering self. How two selves
within a single body can pursue happiness raises some difficult questions,
both for individuals and for societies that view the well-being of the
population as a policy objective.

From the above simple model of the human mind it is clear that the above two selves can only sequentially satisfy themselves. As Gurdjieff said, one I gets the upper hand for moments only then people change I's and the next I enjoys itself.

So thousands of little I's vie for control every day in the waking hours. They can only have control sequentially in linear time, so there must be some sort of a standing in a ragged line. But its an unruly mob so the line may be only a heap - people run on top of each other trampling those beneath - like in Brad Pitts movie World War Z. There is a lot of brawling going on free-for-all.

There is no police: people aren't masochists to police their own thoughts so the I's can be as lawless inside as they want, there is no Sheriff, not even a Deputy Steward. Wow, what an entropic inner landscape!

Looking at peoples minds from above, it can look like a heaving giant mob, thousand of I's are bawling, pushing, poking, singing, doing animal activities, doing monstrous things. Kahnemann just made me realize, painting a simple picture and I expanded on it, how a human mind must look like when viewed through a helicopters camera flying above the crowd and recording live.

Also he nailed people's love for their own suffering:

When people later choose which episode to repeat, they are, naturally, guided by their remembering self and expose themselves (their experiencing self) to unnecessary pain.

 

[SMM]

Kahnemann's book arrived today. I am aware of Dual Process Theory of cognition & quite a bit of what's in the book, keeping the materialist perspective in mind.

I have ordered Kahneman's book and watched his talk on TED.

I am glad that you spoke about the person Kahneman, so I know what I can expect. For instance what Laura talked about: the difference between Pennebaker and Kahneman.
Also, thanks obyvatel for your last post here.

One thing to keep in mind regarding intuition is that Kahneman's views on it is affected by the scope of the fields in which he does research as well as the quality of individuals being sampled.

Dabrowski's definition of intuition states that intuition appears at higher levels of human development and is a synthesizing function which combines emotional, intellectual and instinctive components. Majority of human population today is stuck at the level of primary integration in Dabrowski's scale and at that level authentic intuition is absent. Also Dabrowski treats intuition as a major component in creative work. The quantity of truly creative people is statistically small and they would either not show up at all or will not have any statistical significance in the experiments done by Kahneman and other scientists.

This is an important fact IMO.

I think this is quite important also - the mention of the emotional, intellectual & instinctive components.

Reading Thinking: Fast and Slow I think Kahnemann hit the bull's eye in his intro:

Part 5 describes recent research that has introduced a distinction
between two selves, the experiencing self and the remembering self, which
do not have the same interests. For example, we can expose people to
two painful experiences. One of these experiences is strictly worse than
the other, because it is longer. But the automatic formation of memories—
a feature of System 1—has its rules, which we can exploit so that the
worse episode leaves a better memory. When people later choose which
episode to repeat, they are, naturally, guided by their remembering self
and expose themselves (their experiencing self) to unnecessary pain. The
distinction between two selves is applied to the measurement of well being,
where we find again that what makes the experiencing self happy is
not quite the same as what satisfies the remembering self. How two selves
within a single body can pursue happiness raises some difficult questions,
both for individuals and for societies that view the well-being of the
population as a policy objective.

From the above simple model of the human mind it is clear that the above two selves can only sequentially satisfy themselves. As Gurdjieff said, one I gets the upper hand for moments only then people change I's and the next I enjoys itself.

So thousands of little I's vie for control every day in the waking hours. They can only have control sequentially in linear time, so there must be some sort of a standing in a ragged line. But its an unruly mob so the line may be only a heap - people run on top of each other trampling those beneath - like in Brad Pitts movie World War Z. There is a lot of brawling going on free-for-all.

There is no police: people aren't masochists to police their own thoughts so the I's can be as lawless inside as they want, there is no Sheriff, not even a Deputy Steward. Wow, what an entropic inner landscape!

Looking at peoples minds from above, it can look like a heaving giant mob, thousand of I's are bawling, pushing, poking, singing, doing animal activities, doing monstrous things. Kahnemann just made me realize, painting a simple picture and I expanded on it, how a human mind must look like when viewed through a helicopters camera flying above the crowd and recording live.

Also he nailed people's love for their own suffering:

When people later choose which episode to repeat, they are, naturally, guided by their remembering self and expose themselves (their experiencing self) to unnecessary pain.

I find the above points quite interesting. Going to wait it out for a few days before getting stuck into this book, will be easier to digest then.

 

[lilies]

Complex tasks for System 2

There is a category of enigmas, logic puzzles, math problems for all of us, where we might say these things:
- "Wow, I wish I could solve these, I wouldn't need to work/be where I am."
- Yeah, good luck with that one! haha..

So, I thought, what if? Why not try? Chances are pretty low. Let's say if.. somehow we succeed. Um.. what happened?

Laziness is built deep into our nature.

C's said a soul needs to refill during sleep so I think laziness may be a natural energy preservation instinct for a soul to save fuel.

Time pressure is another driver of effort. As you carried out the Add-3
exercise, the rush was imposed in part by the metronome and in part by
the load on memory. Like a juggler with several balls in the air, you cannot afford to slow down; the rate at which material decays in memory forces
the pace, driving you to refresh and rehearse information before it is lost.
Any task that requires you to keep several ideas in mind at the same time
has the same hurried character.

Unless you have the good fortune of a capacious working memory, you may be forced to work uncomfortably hard. The most effortful forms of slow thinking are those that require you to think fast.

Gurdjieff's extreme mnemonics came to mind. Body building for mental muscles.

Now there is:

(A). sleep: soul recharge and higher self activity
(B). waking state: mental exercises and meditation / EE

Can higher intellectual center functions of (A) be brought down into waking state so (A) and (B) can work together, increasing working memory and awarding the ability to solve enigmas, propose viable solutions to conundrums, see through giant messes, successfully do advanced analysis, perform a mental feat not really typical to the average level our mental life even in a quarter year?

Instead of the above I saw more frequently:
- I slept over the problem and in the couple next days I suddenly saw the light.

A rested, recharged brain and the mind already familiar with the conundrum, prepared by analysis of previous days was able to achieve the feat.

Is there a need to try bring ourselves a just a little bit nearer to the thinking efficiency/speed of exemplary academics?

Well, if my brain can operate at a rate/level unheard of previous lazy me, um.. then I get rewarded more so I can get the stuff I can only dream of right now.

So I must manage to raise my level of thinking and do what was impossible for me before - yep, those things I pretty much called Impossible Feats, Tasks, Puzzles, Conundrums, Too Complex Jobs - do them, put them onto the market and watch how those get me The Stuff.

by Law of Accumulation of Clever Deeds,
rewards
undreamed of
usually appear
we feel elevated, invigorated
small heroes with a big smile on our face.

 

[astrozombie]

This is a very interesting thread. I find it fascinating how my opinion of the original post changed from negative to positive as I read through the opinions and rebuttals, thus "proving" that I am at least susceptible to a System 2 overload.

Kahneman's work may be used largely for nefarious purposes but what isn't? Seriously, what isn't? It is as the very least, an advantage to know the plans of your enemies even if you do not know how to counter them or worse, you may know that you are helpless and hopeless. This will at least give you time to get your "affairs in order".

It seems to me, that we have been programmed to be shortsighted because tomorrow's dangers pose no threat if you can't get past the sabre-tooth hanging around your cave's entrance today. This was beneficial at one time but it now seems to be detrimental.

Given that Kahneman makes no reference to the roles of food and negative programming in our genetics (since his system 2 dismisses all this outright or he may be completely aware of these factors bur neglects them anyways).

Given that the C's have said that everything in our 3D reality has been manipulated in one way or another to further the Lizzies agenda, I find it hard to know where the line falls between being cynical or being cautious.

I find great comfort in their words when they say that the purpose of everything is to learn lessons. I can handle that even if it takes another hundred 3D lives.

 

[lilies]

The Associative Machine in a State of sleep

"lemon sour"

The mechanism that causes these mental events has been known for a
long time: it is the association of ideas. We all understand from
experience that ideas follow each other in our conscious mind in a fairly
orderly way. The British philosophers of the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries searched for the rules that explain such sequences. In An
Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, published in 1748, the
Scottish philosopher David Hume reduced the principles of association to
three: resemblance, contiguity in time and place, and causality.

Looking up contiguity: neighboring thoughts neatly tucked in relation to each other.

How does contiguity occur? It may be facilitated by social programming: what the child sees, how the child ought to behave, the child builds up experience-bricks in the mind until it becomes a house that can house a person.

Our concept of association has changed radically since Hume’s days, but his
three principles still provide a good start.
I will adopt an expansive view of what an idea is. It can be concrete or
abstract, and it can be expressed in many ways: as a verb, as a noun, as
an adjective, or as a clenched fist. Psychologists think of ideas as nodes in
a vast network, called associative memory, in which each idea is linked to
many others. There are different types of links: causes are linked to their
effects (virus cold); things to their properties (lime green); things to
the categories to which they belong (banana fruit).

In other words: context linked associative pathways. Using mechanical thinking - which is the easiest, because it can run on the cheapest fuel - the outside world is experienced then accepted and identified with, then photographed and neatly stored into the human mind (living in a state of sleep). This First World is served in a Matrix-Context.

One way we have advanced beyond Hume is that we no longer think of the mind as going through a sequence of conscious ideas, one at a time. In the current view
of how associative memory works, a great deal happens at once. An idea
that has been activated does not merely evoke one other idea. It activates
many ideas, which in turn activate others.

Here comes the trouble:

Furthermore, only a few of the activated ideas will register in consciousness; most of the work of associative thinking is silent, hidden from our conscious selves. The notion that we have limited access to the workings of our minds is difficult to
accept because, naturally, it is alien to our experience, but it is true: you
know far less about yourself than you feel you do.

So hypnotic TV advertisement suggestions target my subconscious? In this way a mechanical thinker does not notice - chances of noticing are really low - that hypnotic thoughts are being planted via advertisements.

Despite various Mind-Candies vying for approval in the First World served in a Matrix-Context, few candies it offers are acceptable. I need a Second World served in a Work context. Like an undersea volcano, there is a determinant power working beneath the layers of my mechanical thinking can't accept Life's many offers and reaches for the teachings coming from Conscious Humanity as a drowning victim fights for air.

Avoiding TV and most sources of hypnotic suggestion - or checking them out for a short time in Alert Mode, becoming aware that I have/Am The Associative Machine in a State of sleep, rewiring my associative pathways and re-building re-planting new associations like

"broth heat"
"saturated fat anti-inflammatory"
"EDTA improve blood flow"
"The Work guarding of thoughts"
"reality objective observation"
"life self-remembering"
"Me deputy-steward"

activate many ideas, which in turn activate others, but my mind filled with these new ideas - I hope - operates on totally different principles than the old Associative Machine in a State of sleep.

So while the old machine evokes hopelessness and desperation the New Mind instills hope is uplifting, does give me more energy to think on a higher level which further helps elevate my thoughts away from the old machine, the mechanical thinking.

 

[Muxel]

A blog excerpt

_http://socialanxietyhelpblog.wordpress.com/tag/system-2-thinking/

So, how does this relate to personal development? Well, we use system 2 thinking in many areas of life, such as learning to drive and assembling furniture, as illustrated earlier, but we often the neglect another area where system 2 thinking can be profitable – in managing our lives. Why? Well, the first reason is that switching to system 2 thinking can require a conscious or subconscious admission to ourselves that we are having difficulty, or are not getting the results we want. For some people, admitting that their life is not as they want it to be is too difficult and causes too much pain – more pain than living with a life that is less than fulfilling. So they rationalise, pretend everything is ok, perhaps look for something else to blame (see my post on coping with failure), and carry on with the system 1 thinking wondering why they are always stressed, depressed, unhappy or whatever. Another reason is that people often just don’t realise that they are unhappy with their life. They see the little things and pick up on those as being the cause. The problem is that the little things are the symptoms, not the cause of the problem. It’s like complaining about all the water and mopping it up all the time, but not fixing the leak. Therefore, if this is the norm and everyone else is mopping up their lives, it doesn’t seem unusual, it’s social proof – the sheep effect baaaaaaaaaa!!

 

[SMM]

I've been reading through this book the past couple of days & I'm pleasantly surprised with its contents, particularly the use of statistics & its pragmatic approach to thought processes.
Another one I wish I would've read a few years back

A blog excerpt

_http://socialanxietyhelpblog.wordpress.com/tag/system-2-thinking/

So, how does this relate to personal development? Well, we use system 2 thinking in many areas of life, such as learning to drive and assembling furniture, as illustrated earlier, but we often the neglect another area where system 2 thinking can be profitable – in managing our lives. Why? Well, the first reason is that switching to system 2 thinking can require a conscious or subconscious admission to ourselves that we are having difficulty, or are not getting the results we want. For some people, admitting that their life is not as they want it to be is too difficult and causes too much pain – more pain than living with a life that is less than fulfilling. So they rationalise, pretend everything is ok, perhaps look for something else to blame (see my post on coping with failure), and carry on with the system 1 thinking wondering why they are always stressed, depressed, unhappy or whatever. Another reason is that people often just don’t realise that they are unhappy with their life. They see the little things and pick up on those as being the cause. The problem is that the little things are the symptoms, not the cause of the problem. It’s like complaining about all the water and mopping it up all the time, but not fixing the leak. Therefore, if this is the norm andeveryone else is mopping up their lives, it doesn’t seem unusual, it’s social proof – the sheep effect baaaaaaaaaa!!

Thanks for posting this Muxel - can relate to what's written above.
What stuck with me here is regression to the mean, illusion of understanding & base rates. Since it takes more effort to engage System 2, & the idea that people typically are more moved by surprises or individual experiences, it makes sense why relapse into System 1 thinking, or shoving things under the rug, is easier when what they see internally & externally contradict & there isn't a coherent way of explaining significant features.

As Kahneman put it:

To think clearly about the future, we need to clean up the language that we use in labelling the belief we had in the past.

There is a lot of useful material in this book osit. I haven't finished yet but it has been a wonderful eye-opener thus far, even expressing itself in dreams.

 

[lilyalic]

In my opinion, I don't think it's a FACT that this happens to every individual alive. However, I think it's a holistic understanding of the people we are surrounded by. Especially when in the book you are given scenarios (maths problems) or what not, and you try to use your System 1 (recognising and understanding what you have to do) then using your System 2 to work out the problem/equation.

"In psychology, a dual process theory provides an account of how a phenomenon can occur in two different ways, or as a result of two different processes. Often, the two processes consist of an implicit (automatic), unconscious process and an explicit (controlled), conscious process. Verbalized explicit processes or attitudes and actions may change with persuasion or education; though implicit process or attitudes usually take a long amount of time to change with the forming of new habits. Dual process theories can be found in social, personality, cognitive, and clinical psychology."

 

[Laura]

In my opinion, I don't think it's a FACT that this happens to every individual alive. However, I think it's a holistic understanding of the people we are surrounded by. Especially when in the book you are given scenarios (maths problems) or what not, and you try to use your System 1 (recognising and understanding what you have to do) then using your System 2 to work out the problem/equation.

"In psychology, a dual process theory provides an account of how a phenomenon can occur in two different ways, or as a result of two different processes. Often, the two processes consist of an implicit (automatic), unconscious process and an explicit (controlled), conscious process. Verbalized explicit processes or attitudes and actions may change with persuasion or education; though implicit process or attitudes usually take a long amount of time to change with the forming of new habits. Dual process theories can be found in social, personality, cognitive, and clinical psychology."

You are right, I think that this does not happen with everyone. I have observed many individuals who do not seem to have a real "system 2" at all. Everything that goes through their alleged "conscious mind" is little more than programmed thought loops put there by their familial and social upbringing and environment. Such people seem to live in a constant state of "splitting" where everything is always black or white. They think and talk in cliches and nothing seems to be able to break through this.

 

[lilyalic]

Do you think then, that this means, these sorts of people who don't seem to use their 'System 2' efficiently don't recognise it? for example, extremely hypocritical people.

I have observed many individuals who do not seem to have a real "system 2" at all. Everything that goes through their alleged "conscious mind" is little more than programmed thought loops put there by their familial and social upbringing and environment. Such people seem to live in a constant state of "splitting" where everything is always black or white. They think and talk in cliches and nothing seems to be able to break through this.

If these people are taken away from their familiar surroundings and such programmes, would their System 2 arise or tell them to use their System 1 even in unknown grounds?

 

[obyvatel]

The following modified extract from Political Ponerology may be relevant here given that system2 corresponds to the activity of the prefrontal cortex of the human brain which governs conscious attention and thinking.

Frontal Characteropathy

The frontal areas of the cerebral cortex (area 10 according to the Brodmann division) are virtually present in no creature except man and they are composed of the phylogenetically youngest nervous tissue. Brodmann area 10 is referred to as being part of the rostral prefrontal cortex. It is comparatively large in size within the human brain and it terms of development, it is among the last areas where the neurons get their protective covering of the myelin sheath. This area has been identified as playing an important role in thinking in terms of analogies which is instrumental in abstract and creative thinking. This area is also implicated in prospective memory tasks which involve forming a mental map of the future enabling us to act in an organized manner. The capacity for this ability of holding a number of imaginary elements (sensory stimulus independent thought in scientific terms) and subjecting them to contemplation and planning varies among different people.

Brain cortex damage in these areas selectively impairs the above mentioned function without impairing retrospective memory (memory of past events, words, people etc.) , associative capacity, or, in particular, such instinct-based feelings and functions as, for instance, the ability to intuit a psychological situation. The general intelligence of an individual is thus not greatly reduced. Children with such a defect are almost normal students; difficulties emerge suddenly in upper grades only in those affect parts of the curriculum which place burden on abstract thinking capacity. The non-damaged functions overdevelop and try to compensate for the defect in the cognitive area resulting in more emphasis on instinctive and emotional processing. Relatively energetic people can become aggressive and confrontational, risk-happy and brutal in both word and deed. Those with frontal cortex damage do not suffer from the natural doubt and self-questioning that normal human beings struggle with. They become adept at using mental short-cuts to cover the deficiency in thinking ability and tend to provide quick oversimplified judgments on complex matters. They tend to view themselves as being superior to other people who usually suffer from internal conflict and go through effortful deliberation in their decision making processes. Certain types of instinctive functions may get over-developed to compensate for intellectual defects and result in an enhanced ability to intuit a psychological situation. Such intuition is however stuck at a lower level of development without the enriching input from higher level intellectual functions like abstract thinking and higher emotional functions like empathy. But this low level intuitive ability coupled with confident, oversimplified decision making style have a spell-binding influence on people who have insufficient knowledge of psychological reality, bypassing their common sense with ease. A large proportion of people tend to credit such individuals with special powers, thereby succumbing to their egotistic beliefs.

Other examples could include the authoritarians

Thinking problems and lack of self awareness exhibited by authoritarians point to issues with the prefrontal cortex of the brain, which is the seat of reasoning, purposeful attention and self-reflection.

In his paper “How Mental Systems Believe” ( original paper pdf link ), Daniel Gilbert proposed that understanding any statement starts with an attempt to believe it. This first phase which usually takes place outside conscious awareness is termed mental representation. After this initial acceptance, we utilize critical thinking, logical reasoning and comparison with existing data in the memory to cast doubt on the incoming data and make the final decision whether to accept the new data or discard it. This is the assessment phase which is more conscious. The prefrontal cortex (PFC) plays a central role in the effortful assessment process of analysis and decision making.

Neuroscientists have identified a specific area within the pfc called the ventromdeial area (or vmPFC) which plays a role in processing emotional input like fear from the amygdala in limbic brain and the process of decision making. Damage to the vmPFC have correlated with suppression of doubt and greater gullibility in humans (
A neuropsychological test of belief and doubt: damage to ventromedial prefrontal cortex increases credulity for misleading advertising ).

Also, focal damage in the vmPFC has been implicated in religious fundamentalism and authoritarianism (
Authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, and the human prefrontal cortex ).
The study reports that vmPFC patients have acquired deficits in empathy and guilt, tend to manifest punitive behavior, and often endorse moral violations. Reflecting their decreased empathy, healthy authoritarians are also profoundly egocentric as most prominently illustrated by their blindness to their own faults and vices; likewise, vmPFC patients are notable for being egocentric and having poor insight into their own deficits. In sum, the behavioral and personality profile of patients with damage to the vmPFC is strongly reminiscent of authoritarian individuals, consistent with the interpretation that prefrontal damage increases authoritarianism and fundamentalism. This profile arises in the absence of deficits in general intelligence or working memory, consistent with the finding that healthy authoritarians have intact general intelligence. General intelligence tests usually do not question fundamental beliefs or lead to emotional arousal; so it is conceivable that the authoritarian’s performance in this condition does not reveal any serious deficiencies.

 

[lilyalic]

Brain cortex damage in these areas selectively impairs the above mentioned function without impairing retrospective memory (memory of past events, words, people etc.) , associative capacity, or, in particular, such instinct-based feelings and functions as, for instance, the ability to intuit a psychological situation. The general intelligence of an individual is thus not greatly reduced. Children with such a defect are almost normal students; difficulties emerge suddenly in upper grades only in those affect parts of the curriculum which place burden on abstract thinking capacity. The non-damaged functions overdevelop and try to compensate for the defect in the cognitive area resulting in more emphasis on instinctive and emotional processing. Relatively energetic people can become aggressive and confrontational, risk-happy and brutal in both word and deed. Those with frontal cortex damage do not suffer from the natural doubt and self-questioning that normal human beings struggle with. They become adept at using mental short-cuts to cover the deficiency in thinking ability and tend to provide quick oversimplified judgments on complex matters. They tend to view themselves as being superior to other people who usually suffer from internal conflict and go through effortful deliberation in their decision making processes. Certain types of instinctive functions may get over-developed to compensate for intellectual defects and result in an enhanced ability to intuit a psychological situation.

So System 1 and 2 would be interrupted in terms of System 1 not working efficiently? 'More emphasis on instinctive and emotional processing'... Thus, System 2 overcompensates and spills into a persons System 1 (however not as correctly judged).

More evidence to back up the theory and ideologies of System 1 & 2!

Thanks obyvatel!

 

[obyvatel]

So System 1 and 2 would be interrupted in terms of System 1 not working efficiently? 'More emphasis on instinctive and emotional processing'... Thus, System 2 overcompensates and spills into a persons System 1 (however not as correctly judged).

With frontal cortex damage, system 2 would not work efficiently. System1 would compensate for it.

 

[Jasmine]

Hi obyvatel, I just wanted to thank you for this topic and thread. I spent the first part of my day reading the whole thread, and what a pleasure! Excellent topic, and all the added input & independent critical thinking made for a wonderful informative, thought provoking, educational read. Soaked it up like a sponge, thanks again! :)